Basically, in sports we try to quantify and translate what see in the court in the numbers that we can process. The original and most familiar stats are the box score stats, things like Points, Rebounds, Assists. However, over time other people added things to measure like blocks and steals. However, the stats do a very limited job in reflecting the impact a player has on the court.

Over time more and more stats get added things like FG%, however, no new addition is 100% accurate in reflecting what happens on the court in a formula or stat. Therefore, you see new stats or metrics pop up that claim to be a MORE reflective way of measure impact on a basket-ball court.

Are just a few more I could think of off the top of my head. If you just look at the formulas, they can be difficult to understand however, if you take a little time to read some articles about what they are trying to capture and how they do it, it is easier to process. I really think that stats like these really are MORE reflective in evaluating production than just regular box score numbers.

However, no 1 stat, or even a group of stats are perfectly capable of reflecting player performance and probably never will be 100%, the goal is always to just be a little bit better than what we currently use. Also, a new metric doesn't necessarily mean that you no longer use other metrics, basically you evaluate everyone using all stats/metrics available and hope that you get a better picture overall than if you just used box score or 1 specific advanced metric.

Don't be intimidated by the numbers, no one is actually going to test you to do the calculation, just try to read a couple articles and try to understand what some people are trying to measure and you will probably get smarter as a fan.

"We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

so in that sense the coach or gm is gonna roll with whoever has the best PER type deal?

i'm cool with that.

well in a sense yes, and in a sense no. (and I really hope none of them use PER, or atleast just PER, as their metric of choice)

Ideally they will use advanced metrics to see how players are doing and how line-ups are working etc. I don't think they will (and I hope coachs/GMs don't) just use advanced metrics to decide on players. They'd use them for planning purposes (ie. and idea about a player, a line up or a need) and to help identify problems.

Think of advanced metrics as a tool in a tool box. They don't do the job for you, and you don't use them unless there is something that needs to be fixed. But make sure you have them when you are looking to buy that new desk from Ikea.

well in a sense yes, and in a sense no. (and I really hope none of them use PER, or atleast just PER, as their metric of choice)

Ideally they will use advanced metrics to see how players are doing and how line-ups are working etc. I don't think they will (and I hope coachs/GMs don't) just use advanced metrics to decide on players. They'd use them for planning purposes (ie. and idea about a player, a line up or a need) and to help identify problems.

Think of advanced metrics as a tool in a tool box. They don't do the job for you, and you don't use them unless there is something that needs to be fixed. But make sure you have them when you are looking to buy that new desk from Ikea.

At this point, advanced metrics are more for front office guys trying to determine how good their players are and how good the other teams players are so they can get good value on their trades and to help ensure they get a good player. This still doesn't work 100% of the time. I've heard, and believe, that Coangelo uses advanced metrics to a large degree, but that didn't stop the Jermaine O'neal trade from not working. You have to admit it did look good on paper at the time.

as GT mentions, coaches use it to a lesser degree to determine the efficiency of different line ups, and this is something relatively new, and a lot of coaches probably don't spend a lot of time or energy on those metrics. With the success of Carlise - that he is known to value advanced metrics to a high degree, that his line up seemed more fluid, and was seen to out-coach spolestra (and also riley to an extent, but that's my own conjecture) I'm sure more gm's and coaches will move towards greater use of metrics at the coaching level.

"We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon